Public Workshop on the Transportation Sector to Inform … · 2020. 7. 1. · Update the AB 32...

Public Workshop on the Transportation Sector to Inform

Development of the 2030 Target Scoping Plan Update

September 14, 2016

Welcome and Opening Remarks

2

Workshop Outline

2030 Target Scoping Plan Overview

SB 375 and Sustainable Communities

Land Use Vision and VMT Reduction Strategies

Lunch

Vehicle Technology

Fuels

Introduction to the Biofuel Supply Module

Open Discussion Period 3

2030 Target Scoping Plan Overview

California Air Resources Board

4

, I '

•

An Integrated Plan for Addressing Climate Change

50%

VISION

Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions to 40% Below 1990 Levels by 2030

reduction Carbon in petroleum sequestration Safeguard

use in vehicles in the land base California

~ I 50% Double energy Reduce

renewable efficiency savings short-lived electricity at existing buildings climate pollutants

CALIFORNIA CLIMATE STRATEGY

Create jobs

• •

Support vulnerable communities

PRINCIPLES

Transform to a clean energy economy

Give consumers clean energy choices

..... ,'J,'4 Save water

,,~

Make California

CALIFORNIA CLIMATE STRATEGY

SCOPING PLAN

Climate Action Plans

Forest Carbon Plan

SLCP Plan

Cap andTrade Regulation

2040 CA Transportation Plan

1

LEGISLATION

GGRF Investment Plan

AB758 Energy Efficiency Plan

Healthy Soils Action Plan

Other plans/regulations for renewables, efficiency, transportation, fuels

BUILDING BLOCKS

Partnerships Incentives Voluntary Action Local Action

Research Grants Regulations

Scoping Plan Evolution

8

First Scoping Plan required by Assembly Bill 32

Must be updated at least every 5 years

Executive Order B-30-15

Establishes midterm greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reduction target of 40% below 1990 levels by 2030

Update the AB 32 Scoping Plan to incorporate the 2030 greenhouse gas target

Senate Bill 32 (SB32) codifies 2030 midterm GHG target

2030 Target Scoping Plan Development

Collaborate with State Agencies

Engagement with Legislature

Coordination with other plans (i.e. 111(d), Cap & Trade, SIP, Freight Strategy, etc.)

Public Process: Workshops

Economic Analysis with Expert Reviewers

Environmental Justice Advisory Committee Engagement

Environmental Analysis (CEQA)

Draft Report / Final Report (targeted measures and estimated emission reductions)

9

Elements of 2030 Strategy

10

Focus areas within the pillars framework

Energy

Green buildings

Transportation

Water

Natural and working lands/Agriculture

Waste management

Short-lived climate pollutants

Industry

Maximize synergies among sectors

Emissions by Sector

11

Consideration of emission sources when identifying opportunities for policies and programs

4%

Recycling and Waste

2%

Transportation 35%

Commercial and Residential

10%

20%

21%

2014 Total CA Emissions: 441.5 MMTCO2e

Policy Drivers for GHG Reductions

in the Transportation Sector

Governor’s call to reduce petroleum use in cars and

trucks by up to 50 percent by 2030

Mobile Source Strategy

Vehicle technology standards and regulation

Reductions in Vehicle Miles Travelled (VMT)

Achieve criteria pollutant standards

Sustainable Freight

SB 350 widespread transportation electrification

12

Need to understand amount of GHG reductions needed

between now and 2030

Draft reference case (“Business as Usual” or BAU)

Potential inputs and models discussed at January 15, 2016

public workshop

Presents pre-SB 350 current policies to estimate GHGs in 2030

Draft reference scenario modeled

13

Achieving the Target

Draft Reference Scenario

14

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050

Ca

lifo

rnia

To

tal

Gre

en

ho

use

Ga

s E

mis

sio

ns

(M

MtC

O2e/y

r)

Reference

Scenario

2020 Target

2030 Goal

2050 Goal

(~260 MMTCO2e)

,_, ... ,, ... , , \

, ... ,... ...,_ .......... .,. .......................... . , __ ,,_,

. . . .

Transportation

Current Control Programs scenario in Mobile Source

Strategy

Reflects impact of SB375 on VMT

Biofuels

Meet LCFS by 2020 and beyond: 10% reduction in carbon

intensity of transportation fuels

Draft Reference Scenario Assumptions

15

Many policies that will be included in the 2030 Target

Scoping Plan are known commitments

Set of core complementary policies common across all

scenarios

SB 350

Mobile Source Strategy: Cleaner Technologies and Fuels

Scenario

Implement Draft Short-Lived Climate Pollutant Strategy

SB 375 targets

Natural & Working Lands targets, etc.

Closing the Gap

16

Closing the Gap, cont.

Even with the known commitments the State does not achieve

the 2030 limit

Need additional reductions to achieve the 2030 limit

Potential options to fill remaining gap:

Enhance and extend existing programs

New policies and prescriptive regulations

Will be weighed against Scoping Plan objectives

17

Next Steps: Tentative Schedule

Technical and Economic Workshop – Fall 2016

Economic/environmental analyses

Draft 2030 Target Scoping Plan – Fall 2016

Draft 2030 Target Scoping Plan presented to Board –

November 2016

Regional workshops – Winter 2016/Spring 2017

Bay Area, Los Angeles, Central Valley

Final 2030 Target Scoping Plan presented to Board –

Spring 2017

18

Public Comments

Please provide comments on this workshop by

September 28, 2016 at 5:00 p.m.

Links to submit both written comments and view

all comments received can be found at:

http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/scopin

gplan.htm

Additional opportunities to comment will be

available at subsequent workshops

19

http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/scopingplan.htm





20


Integrated regional planning to reduce passenger vehicle

emissions

Sustainable communities strategies (SCS) explore

alternative land use and transportation development

patterns

ARB sets regional greenhouse gas reduction targets for

2020 and 2035

Result is more compact urban form, transit oriented

development, transportation and housing choices 21

Co-Benefits of Sustainable Development

22

Natural resource

conservation

Economic

opportunities

Public Health

Accessibility

Social equity

Lower building

energy use,

household costs and

transportation costs

Mobility and housing

choices

Updating Regional Targets

In 2017, ARB will update per-capita GHG emission

reduction targets for 2020 and 2035

New GHG targets will encourage regions to be more

ambitious

MPOs providing target recommendations by end of

year.

First workshop on target update early spring.

Additional actions beyond SB375 targets will be needed

to meet the State’s climate goals.

23

Advancing Sustainable, Equitable

Communities and

Reducing Vehicle Miles of Travel

Louise Bedsworth, Governor’s Office of Planning & Research Suzanne Hague, California Strategic Growth Council Kate White, California Transportation Agency

24

Sustainable, Equitable Communities

25

Existing Conditions (Santa Clara, CA)

Image credit: Urban Advantage


26

Simulation: What is Possible

Image credit: Urban Advantage


27

California Department of Conservation. 2015. Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Report.

Fresno Metro Area Suburban Expansion: 1984 – 2012 (Yellow)

Households in Poverty: Yellow: 20-40%

Red: >40%

Courtesy City of Fresno

V


28

Sources: State of California, Department of Finance P-4 : State and County Projected Households, Household Population , Group Quarters , and Persons per Household 2010-2030- Based on Basel ine 2013 Population Projection Series , 3/10/2015, CalEnvi roScreen 2.0 , Disadvantaged Communities, Graphic by HCD

Projected Household Growth 2015-25 and Disadvantaged Communities

Disadvantaged Communities (Top 25%)

I I -42 to +4 ,000 Households

- +4 ,001 to 20,000 Households

- +20,000 to 179,219 Households

Vibrant Communities & Landscapes

Interagency vision for land use

Connect strategies for:

Conservation of natural and working

lands

Sustainable, equitable communities

Intended to inform the many plans

and initiatives at the State level that

have to do with land use

Scoping Plan is just one!

SEE PUBLIC DISCUSSION PAPER –

Posted on ARB Scoping Plan website

29

September 2016

Vehicle Miles of Travel (VMT)

Improved fuel and

vehicle technologies

make driving cleaner;

Reducing VMT lessens

how much we have to

drive in the first place.

Even with the most

aggressive fuel and

vehicle strategies, we still

need to reduce VMT to

reach our GHG reduction

goals.

30

Chart: Busch, Chris, Ericka Lew and Joe DiStefano. Moving California Forward: How Smart Growth Can Help California Reach its 2030 Climate Target While Creating Economic and Environmental Co-Benefits. Energy Innovation. 2016. http://energyinnovation.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/Moving-California-Forward-Full-Report.pdf

450

~

0 u 0 350

"' z e u ~ :E z 0 300 ::,

~

250

200

This study's scenarios start al a lower level of emissions due to corrected baseline

, · .. ,:· ..

··•::: .. ( ·.

40-41 % below 1990 level of emissio

Smarter land use scenarios lead lo additional reductions of 24-28 MMT compared to E3 Reference scenario

- - - E3 Reference Cose + More Compact land Use

-- E3 Reference Case + lnfil Focus Land Use

, •· ······ E3 Eor1y Deployment

- - - E3 Early Deployment + More Compact Land Use

-- E3 Eor1y Deployment + Infill Focus Land Use

Smarter land use scenarios lead to additional reductions of 9- f f MMT compared to E3 Early Deployment scenario

Current State Initiatives

Adopted / In Implementation:

SB 375

CA Transportation Plan

(CTP 2040)

Caltrans Management Plan

High-Speed Rail Business

Plan

Road User Pilot Program

31

In progress:

SB 743

CTP, Regional

Transportation Plan

Guidelines Update

Caltrans Rail Plan

Caltrans Bike-Ped Plan

Infrastructure Planning

Potential Additional Strategies

for Discussion

Encourage more efficient, equitable development: Promote development in existing communities to bring

destinations closer together so we don’t have to travel as

far.

32


for Discussion

Encourage more efficient, equitable development:

The State could further explore….*

Encouraging Transfer of Development Rights programs

Promoting regional TOD funds

Rebates for low-VMT housing

Multi-station financing districts

Residential property tax abatement for property improvement

Reduced parking for infill development where transportation alternatives are present

Promoting urban growth boundaries

*See posted discussion draft/handout for more details!

33


for Discussion

Expand transportation choices: Promote a range of viable and attractive clean mobility options.

34


for Discussion

Expand transportation choices:


Expanding & improving transit and active transportation

systems

Transit pass subsidies/fare reduction

Expanding shared mobility (bike share, car share, carpools)

Green construction practices for transportation projects

Other location-efficiency considerations for State

infrastructure siting


35


for Discussion

Pricing: Make the cost of using infrastructure proportional to the amount it is used

36

• Voluntary programs, e.g. mileage-based insurance

and road user charge can

save households money.

• Revenues can be used to

expand transportation

alternatives and/or offset

burdens for low-income

users.


for Discussion

Pricing:


Additional HOV lanes

Expanding mileage-based road pricing and insurance

options

Cordon pricing zones in urban areas where transportation

alternatives are present

Low-Emission Zones for specified heavy-duty vehicles in

specified sensitive areas

Demand-based parking pricing


37


for Discussion

Transportation System Efficiency: Relieve congestion; encourage commuting alternatives; and reducing the

need to travel at all.

38


for Discussion

Transportation Systems Efficiency:


Commute trip reduction programs

Eco-driving education

Transportation management technology to decrease

congestions

Low-Emission Zones for specified heavy-duty vehicles

Demand-based parking pricing


39

“Co-benefits” of Advancing

Sustainable, Equitable Communities &

Reducing VMT

Expand consumer options

Reduce household cost burdens

Improve health outcomes & safety

Reduce time sitting in traffic

Respond to increased market demand for walkable neighborhoods

Reinvest in existing communities

Create communities that attract and retain talent

Reduce energy and water use

40

38%

39%

33%

44%

39%

35%

37%

35%

32%

37%

37%

33%

35%

34%

32%

32%

32%

32%

37%

35%

33%

21%

26%

29%

26%

27%

29%

21%

20%

21%

18%

19%

21%

16%

15%

11%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Del Norte

Humboldt

Imperial

Orange

Sierra

Fresno

Riverside

Stanislaus

Kern

San Diego

Los Angeles

Solano

Contra Costa

Ventura

Sacramento

Alameda

Santa Clara

San Francisco

Pe

rce

nta

ge o

f To

tal I

nco

me

Housing Cost Burden Transportation Cost Burden

Source: Center for Neighborhood Technology, Housing and Transportation Index, Average Percent

of Income Spent on Housing and Transportation for Selected Counties. Graphic by HCD.

- 1; I .. - -, - If I

- 1: : - 1! I -- J_ I

• - II ■

• I

- 11 ~ -- Ii I

- 1; I

- 11 : I.

- 11 ~

- 1: I -- JI i

I

- II : .I

- .Ii I

- 1! I .. - JI i

I

- _JI • ■

,I- --

■ ■

Ensuring Equity

Work collaboratively with communities as potential strategies are further explored and developed.

Prioritize investments and benefits to existing communities

and residents, low-income and disadvantaged communities.

Integrate policies to prevent displacement.

Use revenues to further equitable outcomes, e.g. service

expansion, incentives, and/or cost offsets for low-income

populations.

41

Questions and Comments

42

Public Discussion

Environmental Justice Advisory

Committee

43

Lunch

44

Vehicle Technology Mobile Source Strategy


45

Mobile Source Strategy

Reflects integrated strategy for mobile sources to meet air

quality and climate goals.

Updated Mobile Source Strategy published in May

46

M.y 2016 0 Benefits of Mobile Source Strategy

Smog Forming Emissions GHG Emissions Petroleum Usage Diesel PM Emissions

~ '.'"'" Coast ~ tatewide iL .. f-1~,h Coast

45% 50% 45%

80%

Percent reduction by 2030/2031 from today

Building Blocks for Strategy Development

Current programs provide blueprint for successful

strategies

Technology assessments identify status of advanced

technologies and fuels

Scenario analysis provides

framework to assesses

interplay between pollutants

and strategies

Identifies scope and timing

of needed deployment of

technologies, fuels, and

efficiency measures

47

Vision Model Framework t~

Vehicle t~ t~ lO Sales by

Tech Type 0 Emission Focrors

+ Fuel Blends i New Vehicle t~ ~ t~ rm. Efficiency, + , Tech Type 20.0 2 ' , . 2 Energy l , s

Demond ""'O O!>O

+ Vehicle Elecrricity M ix

Vehicle t~ Fleet

t~ Energy

Activity by Modules Module

Class 0 2 0

! ! HydrogM M iK

Vehicle Upstream Emissions Emissions (TTW) (WTT)

Key Strategy Actions

Establish more stringent engine performance standards for cleaner

combustion technologies

Increase penetration of ZEV technology

Slow growth in vehicle miles travelled

Ensure durability of emission control systems

Expand use of cleaner renewable fuels

Conduct pilot studies to demonstrate new technologies

Incentivize deployment of cleanest technologies

48

Mobile Source Strategy – Scenario Results

49

Statewide On-road GHG Emissions Contribution from CTF Scenario 250 ~----------------------------

200 -+-------------------------------

w N 0 ~ 150 E E "' C: .Q "' "' .E w 100 I.!) :::c: I.!)

50

Vehicle Technology at--• Reductions

fl----• Vehicle Fuel Reductions

Transportation Syst em Reduct ions

0 +-,--,--,--.,.........---,--,--,.........,..---,--,-----,----,--,--,........,.-,----r--,--,--,--.,.........---,--,--.------r--,-.,.........----,--,--,........,.-,-...-,--,----,-----1

2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050

Scope of Mobile Source Strategy Scenario

50

Today 2030

~200k ZEV/PH EV population 4.2 Million

-Cl) Cl)

27% Renewable energy generation 50% LL ... Cl) C) C:

24 mpg Fuel Efficiency 49mpg Cl) Ill Ill ("a 0. Improved system to reduce VMT

11% growth

5% (VMT growth between today and 2030)

Demos Low-NOx truck population 900,000

- ZEV last-mile delivery truck Cl)

~ 300 23 ,000 Cl) population LL

~ (.) ::,

8¼ Renewable Fu els 50¼ t=-

6.5 mpg Fuel Efficiency* 8.9 mpg

•fuel efficiency for class 8 trucks

Next Steps

Strategy provides framework for ongoing planning efforts: State Implementation Plans

Scoping Plan Update

California Freight Action Plan

Short Lived Climate Pollutant Plan

Proposed Short Lived Climate Pollutant Plan published in April.

Freight Plan published in July.

Board will consider approval of the State SIP Strategy in January.

51

Proposed 2016 State Strategy for the State Implementation Plan

Short-Lived Climate Pollutant Reduction

Strategy

,_,._ .... ,. Climate Change Scoping Plan

Vehicle Technology Light Duty Vehicles


Joshua Cunningham

Chief, Advanced Clean Cars Branch

Emissions Compliance, Automotive Regulations

and Science (ECARS) Division

52

Overview of Presentation

Background: Existing light-duty vehicle programs

Vehicle technology today; Near term projections

Achieving post-2025 targets

53

Existing Light Duty Vehicle Programs

Regulations: Advanced Clean Cars rules to 2025 LEV III GHG Emission Fleet Standards

ZEV Regulation

LEV III Criteria Emission Fleet Standards

Incentives: Low Carbon Transportation Funds

Regional Planning: Market Support Actions H2/EV station siting; Consumer awareness; etc

Partnerships: Collaboratively addressing barriers CA Fuel Cell Partnership (CaFCP); CA Plug-in Electric

Vehicle Collaborative (PEVC)

GO ZEV Action Plan (multi-agency partnerships)

Multi-state ZEV MOU

International ZEV Alliance

54

GHG & ZEV Compliance Projections

55

-C1) E en-"' C1) t... N

C1) 0

~i --C1) 1/)

~ s::: LL 0 "C 1/)

C1) 1/) -·-"' E E C1)

:.:(!) 1/) :I: w (!)

400

350 Advanced Ctean Cars

300

250

200 -G-Light Trucks

150 -.-combined Light-Duty

~ Passenger Cars

100 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ w ~ ~ ~ <),.C) ~ <),.C) <),.C) <),.C) <),.C) <),.C) <),.C) <),.C) <),.C) <),.C) <),.C) <),.C) <),.C)

Model Year

t'5 150

QJ -I.I .... ..C:: 100

~ ~ = !

5 0

~,,., ,,.,o 0~ '1,i

Current ZEV Sales (BEV/ FCEV+PHEV)

~ o'~ §> ,,.,o '1,i ,,.,o o<'- ~ o'°' ~o '1,i ,,.,o '1,i ,,.,o

BEV = Battery Electric Vehicle , FCEV = Fuel Cell Electric Vehicle , PHEV = Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicle

BEVs+FCEVs

PHEVs

~..,, ~,,., 0,,.,,.,., ~~ o,,.,~ ,,.,o ,,.,o '1,i ,,.,o '1,i

GHG Regulation: Many of Today’s Top Sellers Meet Future Standard

56

2018 201

Ford F-150

Ram 1500

Chevy Silver do

Subaru Outback

Nissan Rogue

Honda CR-V

Jeep Renegade

Mazda 6

Honda Civic HF LSI.

Hyundai Sonata 6L

Ford Focus SFE

2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025

25 configura ions meet 2020 or later

26 SUV configurations me t 2020 or lat r

/ - , -~'--_

-- ..,• - I

- - ·y

63 configurations meet 2020 or later

Variants or specified for each vehicle model Assumes addition of air conditioning credits

phasing in per EPA rule projections, up to 18.8 g/mi for cars and 2 .4 g/mi for trvcks in 2021-2025

8

Technical Assessment Report

(TAR) Key Findings for GHG Rule 2025 GHG standards can be met cost effectively

predominantly with advanced gasoline engines and transmissions

In addition, light-weighting, improved aerodynamics and better tires also key technologies

Nationwide, minimal reliance on ZEVs needed to meet GHG standards

57

2025 Model Year Vehicle Technologies

Conventional Technologies 54%

Stop-Start 20%

Mild Hybrid (48 Volt) 18%

Strong Hybrid 3%

Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicle 2%

Battery Electric Vehicle 3%

58

ZEV Regulation: ZEV Market Strong & Growing

V,

> w

70,000

60,000

50,000

~ 40,000

"'C C n, 30,000 V,

> w N

20,000

10,000

0

2011 2012 2013

Year Sold

Source: CA OMV Registration Records , April 2016

2014 2015 As of Apr

2016

- BMW

Cadillac

- Chevrolet

- Fiat

- Ford

Honda

- Hyundai

- Kia

- Me rcedes

- Mitsubishi

- Nissan

- smart

- Toyota

- Volkswagen

- Volvo

-■-ZEVs+PHEVs

ZEVs either on the market now or coming

very soon

59

Fuel Cell Electric Vehicle

Battery Electric Vehicle

Plug-in Hybrid

Electric Vehicles

Range: ~ 100 miles Range: ~ 200 miles Range: ~ 250 miles

SUV Car Minivan

24 Models today in CA; 68 models projected by 2021

Strategies to Achieve Post-2025

Emission Reductions

• ZEV+LEV Scenario shows substantial GHG & petroleum reductions *

• SULEV+ Scenario shows NOx reductions increase beyond 2031

60

* ARB Mobile Source Strategy, CTF Scenario, May 2016

Figure 3-5: On-Road GHG Emission Reductions

200 - Current Control Programs

175

• Targets 150

T > ~ 0125 u ....

.;-e .... ..

E E E 100

-;;, C: 0

~ of.

·;;; 75 "' .E w

" i ]

50 " 0 z

25

0

2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050

350

300

:250

200

150

100

so

0

2010

Figure 3-4: Projected In-Use Fleet Average NOx Emission Rate* Trends under Cleaner Technologies and Fuels Scenario

Light Duty Vehicle Fleet

- 0..uenl Control Proer ms

- a eaner TechnoloEies and Fuel$

• Target

= 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2050

Transforming the Fleet to ZEVs is

Needed to Meet Emission Reductions

Mobile Source Strategy Scenario*: ZEV+PHEV light-duty sales 40% in

2030, and100% in 2050 (one path)

* ARB Mobile Source Strategy, CTF Scenario, May 2016 61

40,000,000

35,000,000

30,000,000

C 25,000,000 0

:;::. .!!! ::I 0. 0

Q. 20,000,000 CII

't:I "j

CII .... IU .... Vl 15,000,000

10,000,000

5,000,000

2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

Calendar Vear

2035 2040

100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

2045 2050

Advanced Clean Cars 2

Measure Concept

Increase stringency

Evaluate appropriate policy mechanism (ZEV

mandate and fleet standards)

Ensure ZEVs continue to expand in the market

Regulation may include further reductions below current SULEV criteria emission standard, and GHG

standard

Timeframe: Build upon Mid-term Review Board item in Dec 2016

Board adoption in 2020-2021

Implementation 2026 – 2035 (preliminary)

62

Contact Details

Joshua Cunningham

E-mail: [email protected]

ZEV Program: http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/zevprog/zevprog.htm

Drive Clean:

http://www.driveclean.ca.gov/

63

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/zevprog/zevprog.htm






ARB Scoping Plan Transportation Workshop

September 14, 2016

64

ARB Mobile Source Strategies for On-Road and Off-Road Heavy Duty Equipment

Current heavy-duty programs reducing greenhouse

gases

Technology assessments

On-road strategy and measures

Off-road strategy and measures

Outline

65

• Proposed measure from the 2008 Scoping Plan

o California Tractor Trailer GHG regulation and Phase 1 GHG

Emission Standards (as adopted in California) are expected

to result in GHG reductions of:

3.6 MMTCO2e in 2020

7.6 MMTCO2e in 2035

Current Programs

66

• Renewable fuels can provide significant GHG and petroleum reductions

• Heavy-duty zero emission technologies are currently being developed. o Airport ground support equipment available now

o Battery electric and fuel cell buses are in the early commercialization phase

o Battery costs dropping rapidly

o Zero emission drayage and delivery truck demonstrations

• Technology Assessment reports available at www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/tech/report.htm

Results of Heavy-Duty Sector Technology Assessments

67

http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/tech/report.htm

• Establish more stringent criteria and greenhouse gas

emission standards

• Establish requirements to ensure durability of HDVs

• Deploy zero emission technologies in focused

heavy-duty applications

• Offer incentive funding for the cleanest engine

technologies

• Increase use of renewable fuels

• Increase freight transport system efficiencies and

use of intelligent transportation systems

On-Road Heavy-Duty Sector Strategy

68

Heavy-Duty GHG Phase 2

• Goal: Establish next generation of Heavy-Duty Truck GHG standards building upon Phase 1 standards

o 32 % reduction in CO2 (tractor-trailers ) compared to Phase 1

o Federal Phase 2 scheduled finalized August 2016

o California Phase 2 scheduled for adoption in Summer 2017

• Type of Action: U.S. EPA Regulation/ARB Regulation

• Timeframe: o U.S. EPA adoption date (Federal Phase 2): August 2016

o ARB Board adoption date (CA Phase 2): 2017

o Implementation schedule: 2018-2027

69

Advanced Clean Transit (ACT)

• Goal: Increase penetration of clean engine technologies and zero emission buses into transit bus fleets by developing ACT rule amendments

o Phase-in advanced technology buses

o Require renewable fuel/cleanest engines for conventional buses

o Develop flexibility provisions

o Promote innovative methods of transportation

• Type of Action: ARB Regulation

• Timeframe: o ARB Board Hearing date: 2017

o Implementation schedule: 2018 - 2040

70

Last Mile Delivery

• Goal: Increase the penetration of zero emission class 3-7 trucks used for last mile delivery

o Phase in zero emission last mile delivery trucks from 2020 through 2030

o Work with stakeholders to explore mechanisms

o Update Board next spring




71

Zero Emission Airport Shuttle Buses

• Goal: Promote deployment of zero emission airport

shuttle buses o Encourage early introduction of zero emission buses

o Establish future phase-in requirements

• Type of Action: ARB Regulation/Incentives/MOU


o Implementation schedule: 2023

72

Innovative Technology Certification Flexibility

• Goal: Provide certification flexibility for advanced truck and bus technologies needed to meet AQ and climate goals

o Targets new heavy-duty low-NOx, low-CO2, and hybrid engines, plus medium- and heavy-duty hybrid conversions

o Mostly provides OBD compliance flexibility



o Implementation schedule: 2017-2027

• Proposed regulation and staff report available at: https://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/itr/itr.htm

73

https://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/itr/itr.htm

Incentive Funding to Achieve Further Emission Reductions from On-Road Heavy-Duty Vehicles Goal: Provide incentive funding to accelerate the

penetration of zero and near-zero equipment beyond the rate of turnover achieved through implementation of other measures

o ARB’s Low Carbon Transportation funds and AQIP (~$7 million per year for low-NOx trucks using renewable fuels (2015- 2020)); $150M approved by legislature for 2016/2017 fiscal year (pending Governor’s signature)

o District’s AB 923 and Carl Moyer (~$28 million per year for cleaner trucks (2015-2020))

o ARB’s Proposition 1B: Goods Movement Emission Reduction Program funds (~$165 million for cleaner trucks (2016-2018))

Type of Action: Funding programs

Timeframe: o ARB Board adoption date: 2016 and annually thereafter


74

• Focus deployment of zero emission technologies where commercially available

• Demonstrate ZE technology in heavier equipment and duty-cycles

• Integrate worksite efficiencies, vehicle automation, and fleet management technologies

• Continue to assess the expansion of zero emission technologies throughout the off-road equipment sector

• Investigate need even cleaner new off-road compression ignition engine standards and related requirements

Off-Road Equipment Category Strategy

75

• Goal: Accelerate deployment of zero emission forklifts

with a lift capacity ≤ 8,000 lbs

o Forklifts primed for increased zero emission technology

deployment

o Provide pathway for technology to transfer to heavier

equipment and other applications

o Encourage growth of zero emission infrastructure at work sites


• Timeframe:

o ARB Hearing Date: 2020

o Implementation: 2023-2035

Zero Emission Off-Road Forklift Regulation Phase 1

76

• Goal: Accelerate deployment of ZE technology in

Ground Support Equipment

• GSE already moving towards electric

• Possible Strategies o Incentives for Demonstrations

o Conservative Approach: Natural turnover + incentives

o Aggressive Approach: MOU or regulatory program

• Pathway to transition ZE to heavier applications

• Type of Action: Incentives and/or Regulation

• Timeframe:

o ARB Hearing Date: 2018

o Implementation: 2023

Zero Emission Airport Ground Support Equipment

77

• Goal: Evaluate the state of zero and near-zero

emission off-road technologies

o Identify opportunities to expand use of zero and near-zero

emission technologies to larger, higher power-demand applications

o Inform future measures

o Follows Zero Emission Forklift and Airport Ground Support

regulations

• Type of Action: Technology Review

• Timeframe: Board Date: 2025+

Zero Emission Off-Road Emission Reduction Assessment

78

• Goals:

o Reduce emissions from small off-road engines

o Enhance enforcement of current emission standards

o Tighten exhaust and evaporative emission standards

o Increase penetration of zero emission technology


• Timeframe:

o Board Date: 2018


Small Off-Road Engines (SORE)

79

• Goal: Advance zero and near-zero emission technology

and support the needed infrastructure developments


• Timeframe:

o Board Date: 2017-2018

o Implementation: 2020 +

Transport Refrigeration Units for Cold Storage

80

• Goal: Evaluate worksite efficiency technologies

o Autonomous equipment and connected worksite technologies

o Potential metrics for quantifying benefits

o Estimate emission reductions and cost effectiveness

o Recommend ways to encourage deployment (e.g., through

financial incentives or regulatory credit)

• Type of Action: Technology Review

• Timeframe: TBD

Emission Reduction Assessment: Off-Road Worksite Efficiency

81

Bruce Tuter

916-322-4710

[email protected]

Contact Details

82

Vehicle Technology Sustainable Freight


83

Overview

• Freight Transport System Overview

• Sustainable Freight Pathways

• Governor’s Executive Order

• California Sustainable Freight Action Plan

84

Freight Transport System

85

Modes &

Facilities

--· ~--

Need to Accelerate Progress

86

Current ARB Freight Strategies

87

Trucks Ships Locomotives Harbor Craft

Cargo

Loading

Equipment

• Idling limits

• International

truck

requirements

• Transport

refrigeration unit

upgrades

• Drayage truck

modernization

• Statewide truck

and bus rule

• GHG reductions

for new tractor-

trailers

• Optional low-

NOx standards

• Lower sulfur

fuel for auxiliary

and main

engines, plus

boilers

• Shore

power/at dock

reductions

• Ship

incineration

ban

• Low sulfur

diesel fuel use

for intrastate

locomotives

• Fleet average

NOx limits for

South Coast

• Diesel PM risk

reduction at 18

major rail yards

--inventories

-- risk

assessments

-- reduced

idling

• Low sulfur

diesel fuel

required

• In-use harbor

craft upgrades

– tugs, tows,

etc.

• Low sulfur

diesel fuel

use required

• In-use diesel

equipment

upgrades

• In-use gas

forklift

upgrades

• In-use airport

ground

support

equipment

upgrades

ARB Pathways to Zero and

Near-Zero Emissions Document

88

• Immediate ARB actions

(2015/16)

• Near-term ARB measures

(2016 +)

• Longer term approach

(~2050)

http://www.arb.ca.gov/gmp/sf

ti/sfti.htm

http://www.arb.ca.gov/gmp/sfti/sfti.htm

http://www.arb.ca.gov/gmp/sfti/sfti.htm

ARB Strategies for Cleaner

Combustion: Locomotives

89

Petition US EPA to promulgate updated standards for

all locomotives, including a Tier 5 standard for newly

manufactured locomotives that requires zero-emission

track mile capability, and tighter requirements for

remanufactured locomotives.

ARB Strategies for Cleaner

Combustion: Ships

90

1. Advocate with international partners to the

International Maritime Organization for stricter

marine vessel emission and efficiency standards

2. Develop incentive programs in cooperation with

ports and other stakeholders to bring low-emission,

efficient vessels to California ports

3. Amend ARB’s At-Berth Regulation to address

implementation issues and expand benefits

Governor’s Executive Order B-32-15

91

Multi-decade, iterative process needed to

transform California’s freight system. State

agencies, in consultation with stakeholders, to

develop plan by July 2016 to:

• Improve freight efficiency

• Transition to zero emission technologies

• Increase competitiveness

CALIFORNIA STATE TRANSPORTATION AGENCY

California Environmental Protection Agency

0 Air Resources Board

Foundations for Action Plan

92

Califo ia Freight Mobility Plan

, it,jfl hENljYP'ICY P(.

2014 IEPR UPDATE

Climate Change Scoping Plan

B UILDING Ofll TMa f llAMDfOIIII

S.W-A."T,:,,70(#

DRAFT HEAVY-DUTY

TECHNOLOGY AND

FUELS ASSESSMENT: OVERVIEW

California "' TRANSPORTATION PLAN 2 e@goeeGo-,nt•g,.r.ng C,11tfo,n1a't Tran1po,1ac1on Futur• Q

Proposed Short-Lived

Climate Poll utant

Co11forn10 E1w1ronmentol Prolect,on Agency

e.Air Resources Board

93

Released in July 2016,

includes:

• 2050 Freight System Vision

• Guiding Principles

• 2030 Statewide Targets

• Freight Funding Approach

• State Agency Actions

• Pilot Projects

• Discussion Concepts

Framework of Action Plan

CALIFO NIA SUSTAINABLE FREIGHT

CTIO Pl N

~ , ctn.ardC. , 1,:-,J1.

Ju~:01•

Vision for a Sustainable Freight

Transport System

94

Utilize a partnership of federal, State, regional, local,

community, and industry stakeholders to move freight

in California on a modern, safe, integrated, and

resilient system that continues to support California's

economy, jobs, and healthy, livable communities.

Transporting freight reliability and efficiently by zero

emission equipment everywhere feasible, and near-

zero emission equipment powered by clean, low-

carbon renewable fuels everywhere else.

2030 Statewide Targets

• System Efficiency: Improve 25 percent

• Technology: Deploy over 100,000 vehicles and

equipment capable of zero-emission operation, and

maximize near-zero equipment with low carbon

fuels

• Economy: Foster future economic growth within the

freight and goods movement industry

95

Freight Funding Approach

• Fixing America’s Surface Transportation (FAST)

Act

• Explore Trade Corridor Improvement Fund/Goods

Movement Emission Reduction Program Phase II

• Further explore matching grants, financing

assistance, and bulk purchasing power

• Develop integrated, statewide freight funding

strategy

96

State Agency Actions

1. Work with Legislature on a freight transport funding package

2. Work with California Transportation Commission on updated guidelines for distribution of federal FAST Act funds (per new legislation)

3. Plan and invest in infrastructure to modernize freight corridors

4. Accelerate use of advanced technologies and renewable fuels

97

State Agency Actions (cont’d)

5. Establish a sustainable freight think tank

6. Develop strategies, tools, and data that

consider commercial viability and promote

competitiveness

7. Continue the freight efficiency working group

8. Implement steps to meet existing and future

workforce needs

9. Identify process improvements to expedite

delivery of projects

98

Implementation Steps for Actions

• Transportation and Fueling Infrastructure

o Highway, Rail, and Waterway Network Planning

and Development

o Charging and Hydrogen Fueling Network

Planning and Incentives

o Freight Handbook

• Advanced Technologies

o Vehicle and Equipment Regulatory and Incentive

Concepts

o Renewable Fuels Concepts

99

Implementation Steps for Actions

• Competitiveness

o Cost and Benefit Data, Tools, and Metrics

Development

• System Efficiency

o Freight Truck Platooning, Route Designation, and

Signal Priority

o Intelligent Transportation Systems Enhancements

o Off-Hour Delivery/Pick Up Strategy

• Workforce Development

o Upskilling Programs and Job Training Models

100

Freight Efficiency Working Group

• Participants: Freight industry, academics, advocates, and government

• Developed a series of white papers:

o Funding for Freight Infrastructure and Clean Equipment

o Strategies to Maximize Asset Utilization

o Planning and Policy

o Operational Modernization at Distribution Nodes

o Information Technology

101

Chaired by Dr. Sperling

and

Convened by Caltrans

Et (b/frans·

Pilot Projects

102

• Dairy Biogas for Freight Vehicles

San Joaquin Valley

• Advanced Technology for Truck Corridors

Southern California

• Advanced Technology Corridors at Border Ports of Entry

California-Mexico Border

Discussion Concepts

103

• Inland marine corridors

• Non-traditional transport

methodologies

• Packaging optimization

• Supply chain consolidation

in the agricultural industry

• System efficiency strategies

• Transportation projects • Interstate 710 Corridor

• State Route 11 Otay Mesa

East Port of Entry

SUPPLY CHAIN

http://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwifyP_4k8HMAhVY6GMKHcW0AoUQjRwIBw&url=http://www.packaginginnovation.com/product-packaging/learn-packaging-optimization-can-save-money/&psig=AFQjCNFcsTPYi9QY79XV-lAs9cBnaYraQg&ust=1462476554853568

Next steps

104

• Continued work with stakeholders to refine and

prioritize the strategies outlined in the Action Plan

• Create or continue stakeholder working groups on

competitiveness, system efficiency, workforce

development, and regulatory and permitting

process improvements

• Establish work plans for chosen pilot projects

View the Action Plan at:

http://www.casustainablefreight.org/

Current State Agency Efforts Fuels – Low Carbon Fuel Standard


105

LCFS History

Original adoption in 2009, amended in 2011,

re-adopted in 2015

Goal: Reduce carbon intensity (CI) of

transportation fuel pool by at least 10% by 2020

Expected benefits:

Complement other AB 32 measures

Transform and diversify fuel pool

Reduce petroleum dependency

Reduce emissions of other air pollutants

106

Basic LCFS Requirements

Sets annual carbon intensity (CI) standards for gasoline,

diesel, and the fuels that replace them

CI is the measure of GHG emissions associated with

producing and consuming a fuel, which is measured in

grams of carbon dioxide equivalent per megajoule

(gCO2e/MJ)

CI based on complete lifecycle analysis

107

-10.0

-9.0

-8.0

-7.0

-6.0

-5.0

-4.0

-3.0

-2.0

-1.0

0.02011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022

Pe

rce

nt

Re

du

ctio

n in

Car

bo

n I

nte

nsi

ty

Historic CI Targets

Future CI Targets

Achieved CI Reduction

How Does LCFS Work?

108

= deficits

= credits

Fuels above standard generate deficits

Fuels below standard generate credits

?

.. l •• ••

-• •• -I J

•• • •• •• ••

•• • •• • • • • • • • ..

• • • • • • • ~

Achieving Compliance

Producers and importers of deficit generating fuels (e.g.

gasoline and diesel) can achieve compliance by:

Producing low-CI alternative fuels

Purchasing and blending low-CI alternative fuels

Purchasing credits from producers of low-CI fuels

Lowering emissions of their refining process by investing in

refinery projects or using renewably produced hydrogen

Using credits banked from over-compliance in previous

years

109

Status of the LCFS

Low carbon fuel use is increasing

Regulated parties are engaged in transactions

in the credit market

Data Dashboard contains the current status of

the LCFS

Volume of fuels and credits generated

Percent reduction in carbon intensity

Average credit prices and credit volumes transacted

http://www.arb.ca.gov/fuels/lcfs/dashboard/dashboard.htm

110



Volumes of Low Carbon Fuels

Continue to Grow

111

Before the LCFS,

natural gas and

ethanol were the only alternative fuels with

any market share.

In 2015, we now have

290 million gallons of

Bio- and Renewable

Diesel, and 69 million

gallons of Renewable

Natural Gas.

-

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

1,400

1,600

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Mill

ion

Ga

llo

n E

qu

iva

len

ts (

GG

E o

r D

GE)

Ethanol

Electricity

Biodiesel

Renewable

Diesel

Natural Gas

Biomethane

■

■

■

■

■

■

Other Jurisdictions have LCFS in

Place: Pacific Coast Collaborative

Pacific Coast Collaborative is a

regional agreement between

California, Oregon, Washington, and

British Columbia

Strategically align polices to reduce

GHGs and promote clean energy

CA, OR, and BC: Program in place

Regional low-carbon fuels market

in the future

112

Current State Agency Efforts Fuels

California Energy Commission

113

C A L I F O R N I A E N E R G Y C O M M I S S I O N

Elizabeth John

Alternative and Renewable

Fuel and Vehicle Technology

Program

Supervisor

California Energy Commission

Fuels and Transportation Division

September 14, 2016

114

ENERGY COMMISS,ION 1


Purpose of the ARFVTP

Complementary state goals

• Improve air quality

• Increase alternative fuel use

• Reduce petroleum dependence

• Promote economic development

Health and Safety Code 44272(a)

“…to develop and deploy

innovative technologies that

transform California's fuel and

vehicle types to help attain the

state’s climate change policies.”

115

CHAPTER401

Au ac1 to amend Sections 41081 , 44060.5, 44125, 44225, 44229, 442703, 44271 , 44272, 44273, 44274, 44275, 44280, 44281 , 44282, 44283, 44287, 44299.l ,and44299 2 of, to add and repeal Section43018.9 of, and to repeal Section 44299 of, the Health and Safety Code, to amend Sections 42885 and 42889 of the Public Resources Code, and to amend Sections 9250.1, 9250.2, 9261.1 , and 9853.6 of the Vehicle Code, relating to vehicular air pollution, and declaring the urgency thereof, to take effect immediately.

[Appro,·ed by Governor Sepmnber 28, 2013. Filed with Sl"Cfeta,y of State September 28, 2013.]

LEGISLATIV E COUNSEL'S DIGEST

AB 8, Perea. AlrenrntiYe· fuel and vehicle technologies: fm1dingprograms. (1) Existing law establishes the Alremati\"e and Renewable Fuel and

Vehicle Technology Program, administered by the State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission, to provide to specified entities, upon appropriation by the Legislarure, grants, loans, loan guarantees, revolving loans, or other appropriate measures, for the development and deployment of innovative technologies that would rransfom1 California's fuel and vehicle type.s to help attain the state's cli111t1te change goals. Existing law specifies that only certain projects or programs are eligible for funding, including block grants administered by public entities or not-for-profit technology entities for multiple projects, education and program promotion within California, and development of alternative and renewable fuel and vehicle technology centers. Existing law requires the commission to develop and adopt an investment plan to detem1ine pnorities and opportunities for the program. Existing law also creates the Air Quality Improvement Program, administered by the State Air Resources Board, to fimd air quality improveme.nt projects related to fuel and vehicle technologies.

This bill would provide that the state board has no authority to enforce any element of its existing clean fuels outlet regulation or other regulation that requires or has the effect of requiring any supplier, as defined, to co1tstrnct, operate, or provide funding for the construction or ope.ration of any publicly available hydrogen-foeling station. The bill would require the state board to aggregate and make available to the public, no later than June 30, 2014, and every year thereafter, the numberofhydrogen-fueled vehicles that motor vehicle manufacnl!ers project to be sold or leased over the next 3 years, as reponed to the state board, and the number of hydrogen-fueled

. . l .


Origins of the Statute

Established by Assembly

Bill 118 (Nunez, 2007)

Up to $100 million per

year

Extended through January 1,

2024 by Assembly Bill 8

(Perea, 2013)

116


Investment Areas

• Biofuel Production and Supply

Alternative Fuel Production

• Electric Charging Infrastructure

• Hydrogen Refueling Infrastructure

• Natural Gas Fueling Infrastructure

Alternative Fuel Infrastructure

• Natural Gas Vehicle Incentives

• Med and Hvy-Duty Advanced Vehicle

Technology Demo and Scale-Up

Alternative Fuel and

Advanced Technology

Vehicles

• Emerging Opportunities

• Workforce Training and

Development

• Regional Readiness

Related Needs and

Opportunities

117

ARFVTP Awards

(as of December 31, 2015)

118

Category

Alternative Fuel Production

Altern ative Fuel lnfrastrn ct:ure

Alternative Fuel and Advanced

liechnology Vehicles

Related Needs and Opportunif es

Tot:a l

Funded Activity

mometllane Production

Gasol ine Subsututes Production

Diesel Subs ·tutes Production

Electric Vehicl'e Charg ing !Infrastructure

Hydrogen Refueling Infrastructure

E85 fueling Infrastructure

Upstream Biodiesel Infrastructure

Natural Gas FuelIing Infrastructure

Natural Gas Veh icle Deployment**

Propane V eh fcle Deployment**

Light-Duty Electric Veh icle Deployment

Med i.um- and Heavy-Duty Electric Veh icle Deployment

Medi.um- and Heavy-Duty Veh icle Technology Demonstration aM Sca le-Up

Manufa cturing

Emerging Opportunitlies

Workforce Tra ining, and, Development

Fue ll Standard;s and Equipment Certifi:cation

Sustainab ility Studies

Regiional Alternative Fuel Readiness and Planning

Centers for Altem atlive Fuels

Techn ical Assistance and Prog ram Evaluatlion

Cumulative Awa1rds to Date

(in Imillions)*

$50.'9

$27.2

$57.4

$40.7

$ B .7

$4.0

$21.0

$56.6

$6.0

$25.1

$4 .0

$93 .7

$57.0

t $27..7

$3.9

$2.1

$7..6

$5.B

$5.6

# of Projects or Units

16 Projects

14 Projects

20 Projects

7,490 Charging, Stat ions

4'9 Fueling Stations

158 Fuelin,g Stations

4 Infrastructure Sites

65 Fuelin,g Stations

2,809 Veh i'Cles

514 Trucks

10,700 Cars

50 Trucks

44 Demonstrations

22 Manufactmi"ng Projects

t 83 Recipients

11 Project

2 Projects

34 Regional Plans

5 Centers

nl a

Sou rce: California Ene:rgy Gommissiion. *Includes all projects and agreements that have been executed or app roved at an Energy Commission busifless meeting or are eXIJ)ectecl tor business meeti fig approval fo lo-wi fig a notice of proposed awa:rd . Does notincl ucle canceillecl projects lhal. received no fun cling from AR FVTP. - Fu fl ding includes both comp'letecl and pending vehicle iflcentives. t Pre1..-ous awa:rds from, this cal.egory have been reclassified by projecl type ·fl o o her rows .


Investment Plan Allocations

Source: California Energy Commission, 2016-2017 Investment Plan Update for the Alternative and Renewable Fuel

and Vehicle Technology Program

119

Tabl,e 4: Mos:t Recent .andl Current !Investment Plain A llocaition s (in m illions)

Cartegory Funded Activity 2014-2:0115, 2015~2016 .2016-2017

Alternatfive Fuel Biofu:el Producti:on and Supply $20 $20 $20 Producti:on

Electric Charg ing l11firastructure $ 115 $17 $ 17 Alternatfive Fuel

Hydlro ge 11 Refueling ln1irastructure $20 $20 $20 lntraistructu re

Natural! Gas Fuellin,g1 !Infrastructure $1.5, $5 $2.5

Natural! Gas Veh i:cle !Incentives $110 $ 10 $ 10 Alternatirve Fuel andl

Ught-Duty Electmic Vehieil:e Deployment $5 Adlvancedl

- -

Technology Vehtides Medium- andl Heavy-Durty Veh i:cle Technology $115 Demo11stratio11 a11d Scale-Up $20" $23*

Manuracturing $5,

Reltatecl Needls and Emerg ing Opportu11illies $6 $3 $3 Opportunities Workforce Trainii11g and Development Agreements $2.5 $3, $2.5

Reg i:011all Alitematlive Fuell Readiness and Pl!anning1 - $2 $2

T,otal $100 $10101 $,1001


Questions: [email protected]

Thank You

120

ENERGY COMMISS,ION 1


Introduction: Biofuel Supply Module Public Release v0.83 BETA


121

Presentation Overview

How BFSM fits into the modeling framework

for the Scoping Plan

Conceptual overview of the BFSM

methodology

Presentation of basic model equations used

to develop alternative fuel supply curves

122

BFSM facilitates scenario evaluation of alternative

fuel supply to California for the Scoping Plan

123

PATHWAYS

Model

BFSM

VISION and

EMFAC Models

Vehicle fleet

characteristics

Transport fuel

demand

Biofuel supply

REMI Complete

scenarios

Economic

impacts

Biofuel supply is calculated using a bottom-up

approach, which considers biomass feedstock

124

Billion Ton Study Feedstock Supply

(non-conventional)

Corn Sugar

Cane

Crop-based

Lipids

Waste-based

Lipids

Quantity and cost of non-conventional feedstock for each state in the

U.S. is considered

Feedstock supply quantity and costs are

considered for each region in the U.S.

125

Supply cost for produced fuel is further adjusted

based on transportation distance to California

$ $$

$$

$$$

..... . .. 'L

Fuel use is further constrained by feedstock

availability and fuel production capacity

126

2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Initial liquid fuel capacity comes from Bloomberg New Energy Finance

data. Production ramp rates for maximum production of second

generation liquid biofuels are based on the historical growth rates in

the production of first generation liquid biofuels

Feedstock is converted to fuel, and the lowest cost fuel-

conversion pathways result in fuel supply available to California

127

Co

nv

ersio

n

Feedstock

Fuel

Relative Subsidy Value

Fuel CI

Price of Other Fuel

California?

Transport Costs

Fuels compete within categories

• Ethanol (E-10 blend)

• Natural gas

• Diesel and liquid alternatives

• Gasoline and liquid alternatives

)

)

A fuel cost is calculated for each

feedstock (f) technology (t) pair

128

𝐶𝑓,𝑡 =𝑃𝑓

𝛾𝑓,𝑡+ 𝑋𝑓,𝑡 + 𝑆𝐿𝐶𝐹𝑆,𝑓,𝑡 + 𝑆𝑂𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑟,𝑡

Cost of alternative fuels

Cost of conventional fuel

𝐶𝑙 = 𝑃𝑙 + 𝑆𝐿𝐶𝐹𝑆,𝑙 + 𝑆𝐶𝐴𝑇,𝑙+𝑆𝑂𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑟,𝑙

Price of feedstock (𝑃𝑓) Conversion costs (𝑋𝑓,𝑡)

Fuel subsidies (𝑆) Fuel yield (𝛾𝑓,𝑡)

Wholesale price of fuel (𝑃𝑙) Fuel subsidies/fees (𝑆)

𝑙 ∈ 𝐺𝑎𝑠𝑜𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑒, 𝐷𝑖𝑒𝑠𝑒𝑙, 𝑁𝑎𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑎𝑙 𝐺𝑎𝑠

𝑃𝑙 is wholesale fuel price in the pacific region from the annual energy outlook

𝑓 ∈ 𝐵𝑖𝑙𝑙𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑇𝑜𝑛 𝑆𝑡𝑢𝑑𝑦 𝐹𝑒𝑒𝑑𝑠𝑡𝑜𝑐𝑘, 𝐿𝑖𝑝𝑖𝑑 𝑆𝑢𝑝𝑝𝑙𝑦, 𝑆𝑢𝑔𝑎𝑟𝑐𝑎𝑛𝑒, 𝐶𝑜𝑟𝑛

t ∈𝑅𝐷 − 𝑝𝑦𝑟𝑜, 𝑅𝐷 − 𝐻𝑇, 𝐵𝑖𝑜𝑑𝑖𝑒𝑠𝑒𝑙, 𝑅𝐺 − 𝑃𝑦𝑟𝑜, 𝐸𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑛𝑜𝑙 − 𝐹𝑒𝑟𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛,

𝐸𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑛𝑜𝑙 − 𝐸𝐻, 𝐵𝑖𝑜𝑚𝑒𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑛𝑒 − 𝐿𝐹𝐺, 𝐵𝑖𝑜𝑚𝑒𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑛𝑒 − 𝐷𝐷

( )

( )

( )

Conversion costs and fuel yields come

from values presented in the literature

129

Fuel Costs taken from

Biomethane Black and Veatch Study

Renewable Diesel (Pyrolysis) NREL/TP-6A20-46586

Renewable Diesel (Hydrotreatment) Holmgrenet al. (2007)

Renewable Gasoline (Pyrolysis) NREL/TP-6A20-46586

Ethanol (conventional) Kwiatkowski et al. (2006)

Ethanol (EH) NREL/TP-6A2-46588, Aden (2008),

NREL/TP-5100-47764

Biodiesel NREL/TP-6A20-58015

Price of feedstock includes costs for transport of feedstock

to the refinery, logistics, and fuel transport to California

130

𝑃𝑓−𝑎𝑑𝑗 = 𝑃𝐵𝑇𝑆,𝑟 + 𝜎 + 𝛿𝐷𝑟

Fuel transportation costs are calculated as part of the feedstock cost

Price of feedstock (𝑃𝑓−𝑎𝑑𝑗) Billion Ton Study Feedstock Price(𝑃𝐵𝑇𝑆,𝑟)

Fuel Transport Cost (δ) Transport Distance to California(𝐷𝑟) Costs and Logistics for transport to biorefinery (𝜎)

𝑟 ∈ 𝑈𝑆 𝑆𝑡𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑠

This shifts the BTS supply curve

( )

Logistics and biorefinery transport costs were

derived from the Billion Ton Study 2016 cost curves

131

𝜎 = 𝛼 + 𝛽1𝑃𝐵𝑇𝑆,𝑟 + 𝛽2 𝐹𝑒𝑒𝑑𝑠𝑡𝑜𝑐𝑘 𝑇𝑦𝑝𝑒 + 휀

Note: logistics and transport costs can increase some feedstock costs by more than 2x

A regression model was used to estimate how these costs

change as a function of feedstock price (Pf)

{ }

Policies ultimately impact the cost of delivering

alternative fuel relative to conventional fuels

132

Fuel

Relative Subsidy Value

Fuel CI

Price of Other Fuel

California?

Important policies

• RFS (RIN Pricing)

• Blenders Tax Credit

• LCFS

)

LCFS Credits are important for promoting biofuel

supply in California

133

𝑆𝐿𝐶𝐹𝑆,𝑓,𝑡 = 𝐶𝐼𝑠𝑡𝑑 −𝐶𝐼𝑓,𝑡

𝐸𝐸𝑅𝐸𝐷 ×

𝑃𝐿𝐶𝐹𝑆106

LCFS subsidies are considered on a gallon of gasoline equivalent basis 𝐸𝐷 = 115.83 𝑀𝐽/𝑔𝑔𝑒

𝑃𝐿𝐶𝐹𝑆 is an input variable into the model

𝐶𝐼𝑓,𝑡is the carbon intensity of fuel being converted

𝐶𝐼𝑠𝑡𝑑 is the carbon intensity of the standard in a given year

EER is the energy efficiency ratio

Note: because prices are eventually compared against the conventional fuel, price competition is independent of 𝐶𝐼𝑠𝑡𝑑

Fuel cost example for renewable diesel

transported 1900 miles to California

134

$(1.50)

$(1.00)

$(0.50)

$-

$0.50

$1.00

$1.50

$2.00

$2.50

$3.00

$3.50

Renewable

Diesel

Conventional

Fuel Cost

RIN Value LCFS Value Total Cost

Co

st o

f R

en

ew

ab

le D

iese

l ($

/gg

e)

Total Cost LCFS ($130) RINs ($0.97/RIN)

Diesel Cost ($1.70) Fuel Transport Conversion Cost

Feedstock Cost ($600/ton)1: ■

■

■

■

Lowest cost fuels are selected first and are

subject to a set of constraints

135

𝐴𝑓,𝑡 = 𝐶𝑓,𝑡 − 𝐶𝑙

The competitive fuel price 𝐴𝑓,𝑡 is used in the fuel selection algorithm to

determine which fuels appear in California first. This is the difference between

the alternative fuel (Cf,t) and the conventional fuel (Cl)

Supply of the feedstock (𝐹𝑓,𝑡) is limited by the amount of feedstock available,

and the exogenously specified fuel production capacity. Blend walls are also

applied.

𝐹𝑓,𝑡𝑛𝑡=𝑖 ≤ 𝐹𝐵𝑇𝑆,𝑓 Cannot exceed BTS supply

𝐹𝑓,𝑡

𝛾𝑓,𝑡

𝑛𝑡=𝑖 ≤ 𝐶𝑃𝑡 Cannot exceed production

capacity in a given year

Supply is equal to demand 𝐹𝑓,𝑡

𝛾𝑓,𝑡

𝑛𝑡=𝑖

𝑘𝑓=𝑗 + 𝐹𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑣 = 𝐷(𝑡)

( )

This results in a biofuel supply curve for

biofuel entering California

136

0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500Million GGE

Re

lative

Co

st o

f Fu

el Su

pp

ly

BiomethaneEthanol (Hydrolysis)Renewable Diesel (Hydrotreating)Biodiesel (FAME)Renewable Diesel (Pyrolysis)

example curve only

■ ■ ■ ■ ■

Questions and Comments

Please send feedback to:

Jeff Kessler, Air Resources Engineer

[email protected]

Anthy Alexiades, Air Resources Engineer

[email protected]

Sam Wade, Chief, Transportation Fuels Branch

[email protected]

James Duffy, Manager, Alternative Fuels Section

[email protected]

137





Contacts

ARB Scoping Plan

Rajinder Sahota

[email protected]

Stephanie Kato

[email protected]

Jakub Zielkiewicz

[email protected]

ARB Scoping Plan Modeling

Michael Gibbs

[email protected]

Emily Wimberger

[email protected]

CEC

Jana Romero [email protected]

OPR

Louise Bedsworth [email protected]

SGC

Suzanne Hague [email protected]

CalSTA

Kate White [email protected]

138










Public Discussion

Email questions and comments to:

[email protected]

139


Public Workshop on the Transportation Sector to Inform … · 2020. 7. 1. · Update the AB 32...

Documents

Transcript of Public Workshop on the Transportation Sector to Inform … · 2020. 7. 1. · Update the AB 32...